NB: This email and its contents are subject to the Eskom Holdings Limited EMAIL LEGAL NOTICE which can be viewed at http://www.eskom.co.za/email_legalnotice ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Thanks Comrade Floyd I will also find time to take the debate forward hoping other comrades will follow as well .
Yours for Socialism . Ranney Jomo Segage Credit and Revenue Management Tel : 013 6934158 Fax : 013 6934186 Pax : 82214158 Cell : 0824710085 The denial of social contradictions leads to the denial of dialectics as a logical theory >>> Nyiko Floyd Shivambu <[email protected]> 2009/11/30 04:06 PM >>> *Some ideological questions on the Nationalisation of Mines* December 2009 Comrade Jeremy says in the first article he wrote about Nationalisation of Mines that “the SACP also prefers in general to refer to "socialisation" rather than "nationalisation". He does not however provide a conceptual foundation on what he means by socialisation of Mines in the context the ANC Youth League raised the debate. I, for instance, believe the conceptual foundation released on the 15th of July 2009 assists some of the questions ( http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=136369&sn=Detail ). In the subsequent article, Comrade Jeremy clarifies his position on the entire question of Nationalisation as a principle. Whether we nationalise now is a question that requires a thorough ideological debate, and I think as disciplined young communists, we should concentrate on that. Probing the question of when we should we nationalise the Mines; the DGS (Cde JC) says that “it [nationalisation of Mines in 2009] would land the state with the burden of managing down many mining sectors in decline. It would further burden the state with the responsibility for dealing with the massive (and historically ignored) cost of "externalities" - the grievous destruction that a century of robber-baron mining has inflicted on our environment. In the current conjuncture, nationalising the mining sector at this point would also probably unintentionally bale-out private capital, in a sector that is facing many challenges of sustainability. The problems of liquidity and indebtedness for BEE mining share-holders are particularly acute”. I think this was somewhat alarmist, and appreciate the nuances expressed in the latest intervention. For Marxist-Leninists, the question of when we nationalise Mines should be interrogated within the context of dialectical materialism, not through raising of false alarms intending at causing panic amongst revolutionaries in the cause of a National Democratic Revolution. In Philosophy and Class Struggle, Dialego says, “if we stress the materialist component of our philosophy at the expense of the dialectical, the result will not be ultra-leftism but its twin opposite — right-wing opportunism: the tendency to overestimate the strength of the enemy so that the superficial appearances of the moment are mistaken for the deeper trends at work in historical reality. Indeed, legalistic illusions which stem from an insufficiently *dialectical** *approach to politics, may even lead to the kind of unprincipled compromises which make short term gains, but weaken the movement as a whole”. Encountered with a bigger difficulty of a per se underdeveloped nation and almost non-existent socialist consciousness amongst the few workers in Russia in the early 1900s, Vladimir Lenin never raised false alarms. He was instead inspired by the existent conditions and documented a clear programme titled “What is to be done”. Lenin never asked “Should we do something”; nor did he ask “whether conditions are favourable for something to be done”. As a revolutionary, he documented a clear programme on what was going to happen and virtually all of the things he said were to be done happened. He understood that as a revolutionary, you do not fold your arms and wait for the balance of forces to be in your favour, but should work towards ensuring that balance of forces are in your favour. The conditions in our country are currently favourable to a revolutionary programme and that is conclusively objective. Affirming this observation, the ANC Strategy & Tactics says, “Overall, since 1994, the balance of forces has shifted in favour of the forces of change. It provides the basis for speedier implementation of programmes to build a truly democratic and prosperous society. The legal and policy scaffolding for this is essentially in place. Most of society wants this to happen”. Various other objective conditions provides reason why we have an adequate space to could move decisively on altering property relations. The Road to South African Freedom says “The main aims and lines of the South African democratic revolution have been defined in the Freedom Charter, which has been endorsed by the African National Congress and the other partners in the national liberation alliance. The Freedom Charter is not a programme for socialism. It is a common programme for a free, democratic South Africa, agreed on by socialists and non-socialists. At the same time, in order to guarantee the abolition of racial oppression and White minority domination, the Freedom Charter necessarily and realistically calls for profound economic changes: drastic agrarian reform to restore the land to the people; widespread nationalisation of key industries to break the grip of White monopoly capital on the main centres of the country's economy; radical improvements in the conditions and standards of living for the working people. The Communist Party pledges its unqualified support for the Freedom Charter. It considers that the achievement of its aims will answer the pressing and immediate needs of the people and lay the indispensable basis for the advance of our country along non-capitalist lines to a communist and socialist future. To win these aims is the immediate task of all the oppressed and democratic people of South Africa, headed by the working class and its party7 the Communist Party”. The ANC adopted the Freedom Charter in 1956 and hoisted it as a beacon of hope for the people of South Africa. In the process of organisational configuration, what was subsequently launched as the South African Congress Trade Unions (SACTU) endorsed the process towards the adoption of the Freedom Charter. In 1962, the South African Communist Party’s political programme, the Road to South African Freedom said, “The main aims and lines of the South African democratic revolution have been defined in the Freedom Charter, which has been endorsed by the African National Congress and the other partners in the national liberation alliance”, and further that “The Communist Party pledges its un qualified support for the Freedom Charter”. The SACP 1962 programme declared its unqualified support to the Freedom Charter with an understanding that firstly, “the Freedom Charter is not a programme for socialism” and secondly, the immediate programme for the Communist Party included, “demanding the nationalisation of the mining industry, banking and monopoly industrial establishments, thus also laying the foundations for the advance to socialism”. Socialisation will in this instance be a consequence of nationalised Mines, Banks and Monopoly Industries, not the immediate programme of a National Democratic State. This thesis has somewhat underpinned the SACP's ideological foresight and telescope for a significant period of time, most notably when the Republic thesis was adopted. I believe this is a discussion we should have and will never be destructed by insignificant other issues, and all comrades have a right to raise whatever they want to raise. And comrades who want to raise issues with me directly are at liberty to do so via email, and we will take the discussion forward. Floyd -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] .
